The REGISTRAR, LAHORE HIGH COURT, LAHORE vs EHSANUL HAQ SETHI And Other
This appeal arose from an order of the Punjab Service Tribunal regarding adverse remarks recorded in the Annual Confidential Report of the respondent for the period between January 1, 1981, and June 9, 1981. During the pendency of the service appeal before the Tribunal, the impugned adverse remarks were expunged by the competent authority, rendering the main grievance infructuous. Consequently, the Tribunal disposed of the appeal as infructuous while briefly discussing the competency of the appeal under Section 4 of the Punjab Service Tribunal Act, 1974, and repelling the contention that Article 203 of the Constitution of the Islamic Republic of Pakistan barred such an appeal. Upon further appeal, the Supreme Court of Pakistan held that since the underlying issue was no longer alive and the appeal had rightly been disposed of as infructuous by the Tribunal, any further consideration of the constitutional and legal questions would amount to a purely academic exercise. The Supreme Court accordingly declined to examine the merits of the legal questions and dismissed the appeal.
- Whether an appeal before the Service Tribunal becomes infructuous when the impugned adverse remarks are expunged during the pendency of the proceedings?
- Should the Supreme Court adjudicate upon academic legal questions when the primary issue in the case is no longer alive?
- Section 4, Punjab Service Tribunal Act 1974
- Article 203, Constitution of the Islamic Republic of Pakistan 1973
1. MUHAMMAD HALEEM, C.J.--In this appeal the adverse remarks recorded in the Annual Confidential Report against the respondent for the reporting period 1-1-1981 to 9-6-1981 were communicated to him by the Registrar, Lahore High Court, Lahore, by his letter dated 1st of October, 1982, which were impugned before the Punjab Service Tribunal, but while the appeal was pending they were expunged from his report. Accordingly, the Tribunal disposed of the appeal as having become in fructuous. " not all. Before arriving at this conclusion question of the competency of the appeal under S.4 of the Punjab Service Tribunal Act, 1974, and held that it was " competent while rejecting the contention of the appellant that Article 203 of the Constitution of the Islamic Republic of Pakistan was a bar to the entertainment of the appeal.
2. As the issue was not alive and the Service Tribunal had disposed of the appeal as being infructuous, the consideration of the legal question, in our view, is purely an academic exercise, and we would leave it to be considered in some other appropriate case.
3. Accordingly, the appeal is dismissed, but with no order as to costs. revisions by the competent authorities. Therefore, it is advisable to consult the official sources or legal professionals for the most up-to-date and accurate information.